This is the first of the major film interpretations of the semi-autobiographical American novel written by Louisa May Alcott. It's known to devoted fans as "The Katharine Hepburn," because she is the actress who portrays Jo(sephine) March, the main character.

This is the story of the four March sisters -- Meg (Frances Dee), Jo (Hepburn), Beth (Jean Parker) and Amy (Joan Bennett). We see what draws them together and what pushes them apart. We witness their special devotion to their mother, whom they call Marmee (Spring Byington). The story is set mostly in Concord, Massachusetts, in the early 1860s; the main action centers around the most independent girl, second daughter Jo. Their father, Mr. March (Samuel Hinds), is away from home and is involved in the war effort. The Marches were once well off but now have to make do with what they have. And yet, they're mostly happy. Every once in a while, they get a visit from their stodgy but rich relative, Aunt March (Edna May Oliver), who dishes out a lot of judgment, but who also, reluctantly, doles out a few dollars to keep the household running.

And then there's the boy next door, known as Laurie (Douglass Montgomery), who lives with his wealthy grandfather, Mr. Laurence (Henry Stephenson). They both become good friends of the March family. Jo and Laurie hit it off right away. Will their friendship become something stronger? Watch and find out. As the film rolls along, we see four young girls (who in theory start out at 16, 15, 13 and 12 years old) indeed turn into little women.

The book Little Women is a sizable volume that was originally released as two complete books. Each chapter offers scenes and dialogues that increase our understanding of the sisters' behaviors and personalities. Narrowing this treatment to the limitations of a film presentation (115 minutes here) means leaving out a lot of detail and background. An awful lot, actually. (And an awful lot of crying, too.) Screenwriters choose which vignettes are the most important ones to share, and their decisions ultimately shape how we see the girls. Folks who've read the classic will be able to fill in the blanks; those who haven't may come away with entirely different views of the sisters. In this version, writers Victor Heerman and Sarah Y. Mason focused almost entirely on Jo's life, foregoing any exploration of the inner lives of Meg, Beth, Amy and Laurie. Still, they won an Academy Award for Best Adaptation for their screenplay.

The major scenes are here. Without giving too much away, these are the highlights. Jo sells at least one of her stories. Laurie and the girls attend at least one trendy party. Mr. March falls ill in Washington, and Marmee must go to see him. Beth gets sick, then recovers. Marmee comes home. So does Mr. March. Meg and John Brooke seem to like each other a lot. Jo decides to move to New York City for a bit. Aunt March and Amy travel to Europe. Beth gets sick again. Jo gets writing encouragement from a colleague named Friedrich Bhaer. And you never know when Jo will shout "Christopher Columbus!" in surprise or exasperation. We also witness Jo and Laurie's relationship develop. (Fans often hope the two will get together, but Alcott had other plans.) All in all, 1933's Little Women is a satisfying film that is well worth watching.

Hepburn is believable as an independent young woman who is curious, excitable and strong, and who can show a soft side on occasion. Little Women was her fourth movie, and she was 26 when it was filmed. She worked with director George Cukor on a number of other films during her long career. You may be surprised to learn that she could also strum basic chords on a guitar. (Alas, others were not as successful at "playing" piano.)

My favorite minor character is Professor Friedrich Bhaer, portrayed by Paul Lukas. Lukas comes naturally to his required accent because he was born in Budapest. He's also terrific at showing Bhaer's nervousness and slight discomfiture whenever he comes face to face with Jo March. It is truly amusing to see Bhaer try to hide his growing admiration and infatuation for his "little friend." Watch him, and see if you agree.

Naturally, this 1933 movie was shot in black and white. This technique results in a simplicity and slight starkness that seems appropriate for the era. It serves to make the story seem even older than it is. It's also appropriate that the film was released during the Great Depression, when many families were challenged by money issues in their households. The premise was probably relatable to a good part of the population.

The set looks authentic. The real Alcott home, called Orchard House, is well known and has been open for public tours for more than a century. The film producers recreated it quite well, inside and out. The Laurence house even shares some external features in common with the real Wayside, the house next door to Orchard House. Someone did their homework here. The rest of the landscape doesn't look like eastern Massachusetts, but we see it only sparingly. The result is good enough.

Jo March is a leading literary example of an independent woman determined to make her own way in life. She deliberately chooses not to follow the traditional paths expected of a woman in her day and circumstance. As a fictional character, she has influenced many a young person to take a similar approach to life. She and her sisters mirror the real Alcott family of Concord. If you've never read Little Women and its sequels, you may be prompted to pick them up after seeing the movie. As for a recommended biography of author Louisa May Alcott, I'm partial to John Matteson's Pulitzer Prize-winning book, Eden's Outcasts: The Story of Louisa May Alcott & Her Father, where you can learn "the rest of the story."

Little Women of 1933 has been followed by other movie versions, including the Susan Dey (1978), the Winona Ryder (1994), the Sarah Davenport (2018) and the Saoirse Ronan (2019). Alas, none conveys the richness of these lives as presented in Alcott's books.